Going by the title of this thread I thought YOU were pissed off with this report. Yet it turns out you're looking forward to it.

Well I couldn't care less about it personally. I'm sure with David Chase behind it, it has potential to be good. Although why make a film about a fictitious band in the first place? I'm sure there are many real bands with an interesting history?

I did have a feeling you were trying to bait us with the Little Steven thing... but I feel so indifferent about the guy to be honest. The only problem I really have is him calling his show 'Underground Garage' when it seems pretty commercial to me. I enjoyed him very much in The Soprano's though, and I quite like me some Bruce Springsteen [sue me].

As for 'That Thing You Do', well, a family movie about a fictitious band made by Tom Hanks? I'd rather peel skin and dip it in salt as i'm sure it would be a less painful experience.

I really like That Thing You Do. If this is as a good as that it'll be a great movie. I'm going to give it the benefit of the doubt until I see it.

Yeah, That Thing You Do was pretty good. The music was a bit tame by '60s garage or punk standards, but the movie was really well made. Continuity was flawless.

Surprise, surprise. When I saw this article, I thought for certain somebody here would get angry about it, if for no other reason than Little Steven's involvement. Guess I was just being paranoid. What a missed opportunity, not using such a cool band name. BTW, did you ever see "That Thing You Do"? If so, did you like it?

kopper said:

What is there to argue about? So he's making a movie about a fictitious '60s band. Who cares? It's not like that hasn't been done before.

I searched the Searchin' for Shakes database and, at least as far as I can see, there was never a '60s garage band called the Twilight Zones.

What is there to argue about? So he's making a movie about a fictitious '60s band. Who cares? It's not like that hasn't been done before. I searched the Searchin' for Shakes database and, at least as far as I can see, there was never a '60s garage band called the Twilight Zones.

I figured somebody is going to bring this up anyway, so it might as well be me... http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wirestory?id=11887440&page=1 BTW, I'm not trying to start an argument; in fact, I'm not even going to try to argue, since I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind. I'm just curious to see the response to this. Speaking for myself, I'm looking forward to this movie, because I am big fan of "The Sopranos." I'm in the middle of watching the series all over again via boxed sets that I've been buying on amazon, and I'm up to the fourth season (I just saw the Swingin' Neckbreakers' cameo at the Crazy Horse). I'm hoping it will be something darker and grittier, to distinguish it from "That Thing You Do," which is a favorite of mine. BTW, was there ever a real band called "The Twilight Zones"? I think that's a great name, and I'm surprised no one ever thought of using it before.

I had this album when it came out in the 60's. Did it ever come out on CD? I got rid of most of my vinyl about 16-17 years ago, the last time I had to move many heavy crates of records. I put a lot of coins into the jukebox to play "Fire" when it was popular. Really takes me back!

The Driving Stupid is one of the most genius name in all of garage history... up there with the Unrelated Segments, The Jefferson Handkerchief and The Stereo Shoestring. Thank god for acid!

I believe this didn't come out as an album in the 60s. Just a single. Whatever else is on that album was unreleased until this decade.

I don't see nothing wrong with bands using two mics to create a Lo-Fi sound.

Fred Cole gave me some advice one time during a discussion about recording, goes something like this... ''You can take a bad song into the best studio with the best engineers and producers, and it's still a bad song. You can take a great song and record it with the worst equipment in the world, and it still sounds like a great song!''

'Un-listenable' sounds like a compliment more than anything.

I can't really get into something that's been purposely done lo-fi. That seems kind of contrived. But I do like happy accidents, and miss the sound of some of those old 70's early albums by certains artists that must have been recorded on a really tight budget in not the best studios under God knows what conditions. There are sounds on those records that will never be created again in a commercial studio. Records I'm thinking of in particular of course Iggy's Raw Power , also Blue Oyster Cult's debut, early Kiss, especially Hotter Than Hell is one cool mess with an unrivaled trash can drum sound.

It really depends from one act to another, I personally love low-fi recordings. We used to record to computers (ugh) and then recently, at the beginning of this year, we got our grubby little paws on a second hand Open Reel 16 track tape machine and matching desk. The difference between the two is a whole universe! With Computers we had bleed, awful sound and a general "dead" feeling to the recordings. Now we record live, in one room and it sounds great, we barely get any bleed from one track to another on our machine and the quality, to me, is better than any studio here could offer (South Africa only has digital studios and they are all stuck on pro tools). Some of my favorite records are dirty, noisy and low-fi and because there's so much over-produced crap floating around I tend to love them even more!

It seems like there's a big misunderstanding what can be considered lo-fi and sounding like you recorded into an answering machine.

I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't clear... I do agree with what you're saying... I mean, if a band sounds just as lo-fi live as they do on their records, I think that's fine... but otherwise it's a problem...

Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

I don't think that's true either. I loved seeing the Brentwoods at Budget Rock but couldn't bring myself to buy any of their records. They do NOT bring out the true sound of the band. I think there's a big difference between lo-fi and NO-fi. Becoming one big sound of mush is just crappy. I don't understand why bands wouldn't rather sound like the Shitsville 45 than Party at Steve's House.
The Foreign Characters said:

.

Lo-fi or not is really a question of taste, and I think we've got to respect the vision a band has of their own project. If you don't like a band because their records are lo-fi you'd probably won't like them live anyway, so just don't listen to them.

But I agree with the original post that it's a shame when you listen to a band that sounds great live and then the record sounds bad (whether it is on purpose or not). I guess in that case the band should just decide if they want to be lo-fi or not and be consistent :)

Whatever mood Rachel is in, you can always count on Mary to give it her all. Sometimes Rachel just looks bored.

whatwave dave said:

That would be Mary, she used to be in The Verical Pillows, a band that Rob Tyner was working with before he passed away.The Vertical Pillow released at least one 7" and were on a coupla Detroit comps...a pretty cool all female band.



Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

Totally a hit and miss band. I love the style and song choices but sometimes they put on a dud show, except the rhythm guitarist, whatever her name is. She rocks.

That would be Mary, she used to be in The Verical Pillows, a band that Rob Tyner was working with before he passed away.The Vertical Pillow released at least one 7" and were on a coupla Detroit comps...a pretty cool all female band.

Rockin Rod Strychnine said:

Totally a hit and miss band. I love the style and song choices but sometimes they put on a dud show, except the rhythm guitarist, whatever her name is. She rocks.

Totally a hit and miss band. I love the style and song choices but sometimes they put on a dud show, except the rhythm guitarist, whatever her name is. She rocks.

Hahaha that is my skinny, little arm and balding head on the front,right side.

kopper said:

Found some great photos of the fest on this blog: http://ivyleah.blogspot.com/

Below is a photo of St. Louisan Todd Walk crowd-surfing in his wheelchair during the Oblivians' set. I'll try to invite Ivy (the photographer) to join the Hideout. Here's my favorite, though (you can see me in the lower-right, looking up at Todd in his wheelchair):

Check the blog for more great photos: http://ivyleah.blogspot.com/

Found some great photos of the fest on this blog: http://ivyleah.blogspot.com/ Below is a photo of St. Louisan Todd Walk crowd-surfing in his wheelchair during the Oblivians' set. I'll try to invite Ivy (the photographer) to join the Hideout. Here's my favorite, though (you can see me in the lower-right, looking up at Todd in his wheelchair):

Howdy! Beware The Dangers Of A Ghost Scorpion! updates can be found at http://twitter.com/BEWARETHEDANGER

The first four are a great place to start, but I'd say that #5 and #6 are just as good (if not better) than the first four. They start to branch out into some of the more interesting European and Asian stuff, but keep a really good foothold in the ol' US of A. #5 has ESSENTIAL tracks by the Maggots, Dieter Meier, Hubble Bubble, Shit Dogs, Nubs and the Stalin. After #6 they start to get a little spotty, and they start to cover a lot of ground already covered on other comp series. Here's a few other comps and series really worth your time:

Smash the State 1-3 - A totally legit (ie. non-bootleg) comp series of Canadian KBD stuff. Very killer with great liner notes.
Deep In The Throat of Texas - Another legit comp of Texan KBD stuff.
Total Pop - Swedish KBD and powerpop stuff. But good like finding the LP. There were only 333 made.
Bloodstains - A KILLER series of region specific punk comps. The best ones are (in my opinion) all the USA ones (Texas, California, Midwest), Yugoslavia (No, REALLY), The Scandanavian ones (Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden), Europe and both "Bloodstains Across the World".
Where Birdmen Flew - an AMAZING Aussie collection.
Hate Your Neighbours - Cool New Zealand KBD stuff.
England Belongs to Me 1-3 - Great UK stuff that leans more towards the poppier side of KBD. These are GREAT. They're way better than the UK Bloodstains series.

Here's some good non-punk comps that are worth your time, too:
Killed By Glam - Exactly like it sounds. Rare UK glam shit from the 70s. Cool if you like that kinda thing.
Live to Ride, Ride To Live - Neat "New Wave of British Heavy Metal" comp. Most of it sounds like punk or oi with better musicianship and more polish. There's some really catchy shit on there.

An introduction to Mojo Workout could read as follows:

Ah, ok, thanks! So this is only the Kingsize Kollection. I didn't look at this yesterday, for it has a different cover.

Cheers, Doc

According to the Dionysus shop, the bands are all from '64 - '67. http://www.dionysusrecords.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=904

Hi y'all,

yesterday I bought a second hand copy of this "It's a Kave-In" compilation on vinyl, and it is pretty cool. But I can't find any info on it except that it's an Australian compilation, published in 1987.

Are these revival bands? Are they from the 60's? Does anyone know more?

Thanks, Doc Sanchez